BSDs have a superior architecture in many respects. This is especially true since the systemd takeover.
Administration on BSD servers just makes more sense. Linux seems to be all over the map. I think there are over 1000 Linux distros. Many distros want to change around the directory structure. Simple things, like starting services on bootup, and setting up static IP, become difficult with Linux because everybody wants to pull Linux in different direction - often for no good technical reason.
1000 distros sure, but you can completely ignore 990 of them. The other Of the remaining 10, probably 6 are copies of the major 4, Debian, RedHat, Gentoo, Arch.
People keep bringing up the many distro thing but honestly, no one really gives a shit. Those are hobbyist toys and they almost universally die out after a few years. In those few years a handful of people learn a lot and contribute to the community.
The BSD's are fine. I used them once upon a time. The problem is they are inflexible and all they want
BSDs have a superior architecture in many respects. This is especially true since the systemd takeover.
1000 distros sure, but you can completely ignore 990 of them. The other Of the remaining 10, probably 6 are copies of the major 4, Debian, RedHat, Gentoo, Arch.
Gentoo doesn't use systemd by default. I don't know about the others. There's nothing wrong with GNU/Linux itself just because some distros decide to ruin themselves by including systemd.
I remember trying NetBSD back around 2002, and I really liked some aspects of it compared to the Linux distros I knew back then. Hardware support was pretty bad, though. Fortunately, I soon discovered Gentoo whose package management is derived from the BSDs, but having the hardware support of Linux and the nicer (IMHO) G
> Gentoo doesn't use systemd by default. I don't know about the others. There's nothing wrong with GNU/Linux itself just because some distros decide to ruin themselves by including systemd.
I am using a gentoo based distro right now. No systemd, but gentoo is not a very standard Linux.
Also you post about "some distros" as if there are just a few systemd distros. In reality, systemd has fairly well taken over, especially in the corporate world. Very few individuals, and even fewer corporations, want to bother with the high admin overhead of gentoo or slackware.
If true, it's a shame (Score:5, Interesting)
IMO:
BSDs have a superior architecture in many respects. This is especially true since the systemd takeover.
Administration on BSD servers just makes more sense. Linux seems to be all over the map. I think there are over 1000 Linux distros. Many distros want to change around the directory structure. Simple things, like starting services on bootup, and setting up static IP, become difficult with Linux because everybody wants to pull Linux in different direction - often for no good technical reason.
Linux certai
Re: (Score:5, Interesting)
1000 distros sure, but you can completely ignore 990 of them. The other Of the remaining 10, probably 6 are copies of the major 4, Debian, RedHat, Gentoo, Arch.
People keep bringing up the many distro thing but honestly, no one really gives a shit. Those are hobbyist toys and they almost universally die out after a few years. In those few years a handful of people learn a lot and contribute to the community.
The BSD's are fine. I used them once upon a time. The problem is they are inflexible and all they want
Re: (Score:3)
BSDs have a superior architecture in many respects. This is especially true since the systemd takeover.
1000 distros sure, but you can completely ignore 990 of them. The other Of the remaining 10, probably 6 are copies of the major 4, Debian, RedHat, Gentoo, Arch.
Gentoo doesn't use systemd by default. I don't know about the others. There's nothing wrong with GNU/Linux itself just because some distros decide to ruin themselves by including systemd.
I remember trying NetBSD back around 2002, and I really liked some aspects of it compared to the Linux distros I knew back then. Hardware support was pretty bad, though. Fortunately, I soon discovered Gentoo whose package management is derived from the BSDs, but having the hardware support of Linux and the nicer (IMHO) G
Re:If true, it's a shame (Score:2)
> Gentoo doesn't use systemd by default. I don't know about the others. There's nothing wrong with GNU/Linux itself just because some distros decide to ruin themselves by including systemd.
I am using a gentoo based distro right now. No systemd, but gentoo is not a very standard Linux.
Also you post about "some distros" as if there are just a few systemd distros. In reality, systemd has fairly well taken over, especially in the corporate world. Very few individuals, and even fewer corporations, want to bother with the high admin overhead of gentoo or slackware.